Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12777 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2025 Thana- GORADIH District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Yadav S/O Kailash Yadav @ Kailesh Yadav @ Butal Yadav R/O Village- Itwa- Kashimpur, P.S- Goradih, Distt.- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate Mr. Murlidhar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Goradih P.S. Case No. 248 of 2025, registered under Sections 25, 7, 27 of the Arms Act and Section 66(c) of the I.T. Act.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner along with other co-accused persons were identified by the police through a viral video on the social media brandishing and firing illegal firearms in the Chhathiyara programme of birth of grandson in the house of Ashok Yadav.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner has neither made any firing nor any injury has been caused to anyone rather the allegation levelled against the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12777 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026 2/2 petitioner is of waiving arms. It is next submitted that name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of disclosure made by local chaukidar. The petitioner has got two criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that other co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 04.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 7076 of 2026.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR and was seen flashing arms in the viral video. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer is rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below and pray for regular bail. If any such application is filed, the Court below shall consider and dispose of the same on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T